My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
4.2. SR 10-20-1997
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
1993 - 1999
>
1997
>
10/20/1997
>
4.2. SR 10-20-1997
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:32:59 AM
Creation date
8/11/2003 8:36:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
10/20/1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
is a Iof of work, and that they are only providing recreation. I observed that the scope of services that <br />they are providing are only a portion of the programs and services that the Community Recreation <br />Board programs and services provide. <br /> <br />Although I have been frustrated about the Zimmerman program, I have come to this conclusion. A <br />mission has been accomplished. There was a day when only the city of Elk River was spending any <br />money for recreational services. Now others have also realized the community benefit and are <br />making it a priority. We simply haven't all grown to want to provide the exact same level of service. <br /> <br />E. 1) Discussion with Otsego Council representatives: I was in attendance at the Otsego Park <br />Commission meeting this past October 14th where Mayor Larry Foumier and several other council <br />reps. were also present. The Mayor offered to meet with myself or any other representative of the <br />Community Recreation Board. I suggested that the dialogue has to be with the whole Recreation <br />Board and that he is welcome at our October 20th meeting. I expect the Mayor and other council and <br />park commission reps to be at our meeting. <br /> <br />I am hearing support for our program, but that the cost to Otsego is to high. <br /> <br />At the October 14th meeting the Park Commission appointed a sub committee to study the feasibility <br />of doing the program on their own. <br /> <br />E.2) Discuss: Options / effects for non-resident fees and other related services. Considering our <br />future with fewer communities, the Board will need to determine different fee structures, brochure <br />delivery, and service to youth athletic associations ( field use coordination and program registration <br />support). The following is a list of options for consideration, <br />- Increased non-resident registration fees <br />- Review pay at the door and free program admission procedures <br />- Delay registration for programs to non participants <br />- Send program flyer/brochures to only participating community residents <br />- Increase service fees to associations that utilize facilities that are being maintained with municipal <br />dollars <br />- Consider asessing youth associations a per participant fee based on the assumtion that not all of <br />their participants reside exclusively within supporting Recreation Board communities. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.